Christ is King!

The Remnant Newspaper ^ | March 28, 2024 | Michael Davies, RIP

[ebb tide]

Forty years later, almost to the day, by the promulgation of Dignitatis humanae on 7 December 1965, the Church ceased to demand that rulers give public honour and obedience to Christ. The title of the Declaration itself, "The Dignity of the Human Person," epitomizes the man-centred ethos of the Declaration. It is no longer the rights of Christ the King which must take priority but the so called rights of contemporary man, rights which he ascribes to himself in virtue of what is said to be his developing consciousness of his own dignity. In an address to the last Council meeting, on the very day of the promulgation of the Declaration, Pope Paul VI remarked:

One must realize that this Council, which exposed itself to human judgement, insisted very much more upon this pleasant side of man, rather than his unpleasant one. Its attitude was very much and deliberately optimistic. A wave of affection and admiration flowed from the Council over the modern world of humanity. Errors were condemned, indeed, because charity demanded this no less than did truth, but for the persons themselves there was only warning, respect, and love. Instead of depressing diagnoses, encouraging remedies; instead of direful prognostics, messages of trust issued from the Council to the present-day world. The modem world's values were not only respected but honoured, its efforts approved, its aspirations purified and blessed.

Does anyone remember any errors condemned by VCII?

[ebb tide]

Ping

[Freee-dame]

Bump

[Chicory]

VCII was a pastoral, not doctrinal, council.

[ebb tide]

Tell that to Bergoglio.

Francis affirms no place in church for those who reject Vatican II

[Chicory]

I’m just saying what they said at the time. They didn’t intend to change doctrine, just to recast it is more modern philosophical terms.

Pope Francis has brought back the insanity and cruelty of what those carried away by their vision of a “renewed” church did back then.

I think of Christ on the cross and how the Church is the Body of Christ, and I know in the end He will conquer.

It is important to pray, even more important than dwelling on what is happening.

[ebb tide]

They didn’t intend to change doctrine, just to recast it is more modern philosophical terms.

I think the modernists who hijacked the council did intentionally try to change doctrine.

[daniel1212]

The separation of Church and State was condemned unequivocally by the Roman Pontiffs until the Second Vatican Council. The Church's teaching is that the State has an obligation to render public worship to God in accord with liturgy of the true Church, the Catholic Church, to uphold its teaching, and to aid the Church in the carrying out of her functions.

No separation indeed. Wokeism yearns for the power of medieval Rome:

Pope Pius IX, The Syllabus (of Errors): "[It is error to believe that] Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true." Pope Pius IX, The Syllabus (of Errors), Issued in 1864, Section III, Indifferentism, Latitudinarianism, #15. http://www.ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/P9SYLL.HTM

Pope Pius X: That the State must be separated from the Church is a thesis absolutely false, a most pernicious error. Based, as it is, on the principle that the State must not recognize any religious cult, it is in the first place guilty of a great injustice to God; ... Hence the Roman Pontiffs have never ceased, as circumstances required, to refute and condemn the doctrine of the separation of Church and State. — Vehementer Nos, On the French Law of Separation, Encyclical of Pope Pius X promulgated on February 11, 1906.

Pope Pius IX, The Syllabus (of Errors): "[It is error to believe that] The (Catholic) Church has not the power of using force, nor has she any temporal power, direct or indirect." Section V, Errors Concerning the Church and Her Rights, #24. http://www.ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/P9SYLL.HTM

The Church has the right,...to admonish or warn its members, ecclesiastical or lay, who have not conformed to its laws and also, if needful to punish them by physical means, that is, coercive jurisdiction.... with the formal recognition of the Church by the State...came an appeal from the Church to the secular arm for aid in enforcing the said penalties, which aid was always willingly granted.... — Catholic Encyclopedia Jurisdiction; http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08567a.htm

• Canons of the Ecumenical Fourth Lateran Council (canon 3), 1215:

Secular authorities, whatever office they may hold, shall be admonished and induced and if necessary compelled by ecclesiastical censure, that as they wish to be esteemed and numbered among the faithful, so for the defense of the faith they ought publicly to take an oath that they will strive in good faith and to the best of their ability to exterminate [one version says expel] in the territories subject to their jurisdiction all heretics pointed out by the Church; so that whenever anyone shall have assumed authority, whether spiritual or temporal, let him be bound to confirm this decree by oath.

But if a temporal ruler, after having been requested and admonished by the Church, should neglect to cleanse his territory of this heretical foulness, let him be excommunicated by the metropolitan and the other bishops of the province. If he refuses to make satisfaction within a year, let the matter be made known to the supreme pontiff, that he may declare the ruler’s vassals absolved from their allegiance and may offer the territory to be ruled lay Catholics, who on the extermination of the heretics may possess it without hindrance and preserve it in the purity of faith; the right, however, of the chief ruler is to be respected as long as he offers no obstacle in this matter and permits freedom of action.

The same law is to be observed in regard to those who have no chief rulers (that is, are independent). Catholics who have girded themselves with the cross for the extermination of the heretics, shall enjoy the indulgences and privileges granted to those who go in defense of the Holy Land. (http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/lateran4.asp) More.

[metmom]

The separation of Church and State was condemned unequivocally by the Roman Pontiffs until the Second Vatican Council. The Church's teaching is that the State has an obligation to render public worship to God in accord with liturgy of the true Church, the Catholic Church, to uphold its teaching, and to aid the Church in the carrying out of her functions.

Clearly the Roman religion calling itself the *Catholic church*, doesn't want its power grabs interfered with.

[Elsie]

Does anyone remember any errors condemned by VCII?

Heck, if anyone even MENTIONS the Counter Reformation Catholics will jump in to assure the unknowing that there were NO errors that needed to be corrected.

[Elsie]

It is important to pray, even more important than dwelling on what is happening.

---

Yes!

Let's just keep whistling as we'll be past the graveyard soon.

[ebb tide]

Looks like you misread the statement, "The separation of Church and State was condemned unequivocally by the Roman Pontiffs until the Second Vatican Council."

[Chicory]

I do not mean to ignore what is happening or to do nothing, but praying instead of dwelling on or fretting about something we can do no more about.

God can do so much more than we can!

[daniel1212]

Looks like you misread the statement, "The separation of Church and State was condemned unequivocally by the Roman Pontiffs until the Second Vatican Council."

Looks like you misunderstood "No separation indeed. Wokeism yearns for the power of medieval Rome:'

[ebb tide]

You still don’t get your error.

Pitiful.

[daniel1212]

You still don’t get your error. Pitiful.

What error do see in blindness?

[Campion]

Does objective religious truth really exist, or doesn't it? You have to admit there's a certain ... incoherence in claiming that it exists while rejecting the idea that the State, ideally, ought to be bound by it.

I don't think an authentic Christian believer can really argue that freedom of religion is an unalloyed good. Maybe it's the best of the realistically available alternatives, but that's not the same thing as an unalloyed good.

Pace Pope Francis, the diversity of religious opinions is at best permitted by God; it certainly isn't desired or ordained by Him.